FTP Discussion Thread (Everything but big new news goes here. Cliffs in OP)

[Diamond_Flush]

Originally Posted by bbfg

I think (not sure) Jeff said around 30 days a few days ago on the forums.

Pretty sure he said 30-60 days, but I would think that was the absolute minimum. Doesnt seem unreasonable tbh, and that would be after all conditions of the deal were met.

All the terms and conditions of any deal like this are subject to change until that last minute, and that shouldnt come as any surprise to anyone.
Just have to hope there continues to be a meeting of the minds on all fronts.

GL us.

[Go Get It]

Originally Posted by Diamond_Flush

You are wrong.
IIRC Jeff I. told us back in August, after the period of exclusivity expired with the other investor, that there were still 3 potential investors in the wings. Like most people, I doubted this was true as well. I was wrong.

All I can say is that this current investor is real. I have personally seen the docs. I won't comment on the investor name or the terms at this time. As with any deal, even the seemingly ultra un-encumbered ones, there are always things that can make it happen/not happen, so I can never say it is a "sure thing", but I can say that everyone is working very hard to make it happen.

How likely, based on what you've seen/heard, do you think a deal gets done with the current potential investor?

[Diamond_Flush]

Originally Posted by Dombax

" Full Tilt Poker to Full Tilt Players " petition , has just reached 310 "Idiots" signatures.

If you agree that a " B " plan is important and can save your claim , if no investor unfortunately would come to pay your bankroll , come to sign at

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/ftp/

It doesn't cost one penny and is not binding at all !

This is the biggest example of spam on these forums in a long time, and I have no idea why you havent been stopped/banned.

Stop please.

[bbfg]

Originally Posted by Diamond_Flush

Pretty sure he said 30-60 days, but I would think that was the absolute minimum. Doesnt seem unreasonable tbh, and that would be after all conditions of the deal were met.

All the terms and conditions of any deal like this are subject to change until that last minute, and that shouldnt come as any surprise to anyone.
Just have to hope there continues to be a meeting of the minds on all fronts.

GL us.

Pretty sure that at some point during the"preperation period" the investors would ~100% commit. If I would have to guess I would guess that it would even be in the early stages of that prep. This is pure speculation though.

[Rhubarbwp]

Originally Posted by Diamond_Flush

Pretty sure he said 30-60 days, but I would think that was the absolute minimum. Doesnt seem unreasonable tbh, and that would be after all conditions of the deal were met.

All the terms and conditions of any deal like this are subject to change until that last minute, and that shouldnt come as any surprise to anyone.
Just have to hope there continues to be a meeting of the minds on all fronts.

GL us.

I've just been reading through the AGCC application documents and rules etc. From my understanding it isn't possible to transfer a Type 1 Licence. It's therefore, necessary in order for FTP to start offering games again they need a buyer with a Licence. Is this correct and what Ifrah is referring to with his timeline?

From a reading of their Application Faq in best case scenarios this would take 30-60 days assuming the three required parts, Suitability, Fair Games and Adequate Processes are completed in parallel -

Whether or not this would delay payouts I have no idea.

[Bene Gesserit]

Originally Posted by Diamond_Flush

This is the biggest example of spam on these forums in a long time, and I have no idea why you havent been stopped/banned.

Stop please.

Yes please its like an infomercial ...call in the next 20 minutes we'll double your order

[Diamond_Flush]

Originally Posted by Go Get It

How likely, based on what you've seen/heard, do you think a deal gets done with the current potential investor?

I don't know. That's the truth.

When I said earlier that everyone is trying to make it happen, I wasn't referring only to FTP, I meant the investor as well.

That said, there are some obstacles that have to get ironed out in any deal with FTP right now, which should be no surprise to anyone.

When all is said and done, I'd like to think there is a decent chance for this to happen, so like everyone else, I have my fingers crossed.
For me to say anything different, would just be speculation for now.
Hopefully within these next days, we will have more solid info.

[Hippy80]

Originally Posted by Rhubarbwp

I've just been reading through the AGCC application documents and rules etc. From my understanding it isn't possible to transfer a Type 1 Licence. It's therefore, necessary in order for FTP to start offering games again they need a buyer with a Licence.

From a reading of their Application Faq in best case scenarios this would take 30-60 days assuming the three required parts, Suitability, Fair Games and Adequate Processes are completed in parallel -

Whether or not this would delay payouts I have no idea.

Depends if the ownership of the Licencing company changes or not. The ownership of Pocket kings and Tiltware could change, but leave companies like Filco as they are. They are in essence shell companies solely used for licencing agreements.

This is the most likely situation imo, if this deal goes ahead. This would allow FTP to restart pretty quickly, and allow the new owners to start raking to recoup their investment in the shortest time. They could then set up an new company to handle the licences, and switch licence at a later date.

I just hope the Senior Management at FTP is changed as part of this deal, because without this basic requirement, not much will change in operating practice.

TBH, I'm sceptical about the deal, but as it's been picked up by so many non poker media outlets in France, it has a ring of plausibility to it.

[Jokko]

Originally Posted by la6ki

I understand your skepticism, but how do you explain the coverage in the French media (among other things)? Also, what do you think is the point in them spreading this rumor? What are they achieving?

They achieve more readers to their newspaper.

[striker_1]

Originally Posted by Rhubarbwp

From my understanding it isn't possible to transfer a Type 1 Licence.

This question is really important in how much we buy Ifrah Story. If it's indeed untransferable, why would the an AGGC verdict be so important. Could you please quote what you base your understanding on? An answer to that question is crucial in understanding what's going on and whether the 2+2 members, ftp players and maybe the potential investors are being misleaded/manipulated.

Ty

[Eldorian]

Originally Posted by Dombax

It is not a Spam . We are just trying to help people get money back from FTP .

It's possible that you do not agree . But 315 persons have signed in 48 hours . Respect their opinion. Thank's

Thats pretty impressive, as its just two guys creating email accounts... 160 accounts each in 48 hours show real commitment...

[Bene Gesserit]

Originally Posted by Dombax

It is not an infomercial . We are just trying to help people get money back from FTP .

It's possible that you do not agree . But 315 persons have signed in 48 hours . Respect their opinion. Please ...

Keep it going if you want, BTW your English is getting better and better. Hope you suceed

[munkey]

Originally Posted by NoahSD

Bankruptcy doesn't change much from the DOJ's perspective. The DOJ's lawsuit is against the assets themselves, so the DOJ still has claim on those assets no matter the financial situation of the owners of the assets.

I agree that the DOJ has the in rem claim on those assets (baring a new agreement) but although only the DOJ can answer if bankruptcy changes the DOJ's perspective I disagree. Has someone told you from the DOJ that they are invariant on whether FTP is sold or not or is that your opinion?

1. The value of FTP sold > value in bankruptcy
2. There is insufficient money (in FTP) to pay players and DOJ fines, costs..
3. DOJ wishes to max (within constraints) fine from FTP

Therefore, if accept the above I think they'd prefer it sold,the amended civil complaint makes it clear that they allege all the monies have gone to 'FTP Insiders' and little is in the company for players or to pay DOJ fines.

Plus as I mentioned today, IMHO a sale negates any ROW claims or complex multi-jurisdictional issues that arise out of the international nature of FTP's customers and organisation.

P.S. let me thank you (& 2p2) for the special 2p2 Pokercast. I recommend everyone here listen to it although it is 2hrs long, i listened to it in parts.

Originally Posted by DoTheMath

Munkey, you have a great track record in looking up and interpreting legislation and regulations. Do you really think that under the Aldrney eGambling Regulations and their backing legislation a new buyer could operate without first getting a new licence?

Hmm, tks - I guess I know where to find parts of potentially relevant legislation. I wouldn't hold any weight in any interpretation I may post as it's just an opinion and usually I post it expecting to be corrected.

From what I remember the AGCC regs ( not the actual law but pretty close I think as you say) are fairly interpretative and there isn't any (public) precedent. Certainly as we know from the conduct of the hearings there is a degree of flexibility.

IIRC there is a rule barring transferring of licences but one could say a sale of the company isn't a transfer it's still with FTP

I asked the other day as I couldn't find anything in them re: directions when something like this does happen. Anyone know?

At the end of the day if a deal goes through the AGCC can say we messed up but at least no players lost money. It still doesn't change the fact that there's been a regulatory failure but reduces their litigation risk and the chance the (UK) Gambling Commission drops them killing their other licencee's revenue.

[Rhubarbwp]

Originally Posted by striker_1

This question is really important in how much we buy Ifrah Story. If it's indeed untransferable, why would the an AGGC verdict be so important. Could you please quote what you base your understanding on? An answer to that question is crucial in understanding what's going on and whether the 2+2 members, ftp players and maybe the potential investors are being misleaded/manipulated.

Ty

Licences and certificates personal to holder.
9. An eGambling licence or any certificate issued by the Commission under section 7 of this Ordinance is not capable of being assigned and cannot be transferred by the eGambling licensee or certificate holder.

From Page 9 of the Alderney eGambling Ordinance, 2009

EDIT: Also they can't apply for a Temporary Licence as that can only be offered to Foreign Entities and presumably they will get a quicker licence from AGCC so will register with them...

[SGT RJ]

Originally Posted by Dombax

It is not an infomercial . We are just trying to help people get money back from FTP .

It's possible that you do not agree . But 315 persons have signed in 48 hours . Respect their opinion. Please ...

Actually, given that you're posting updates when another 10 people sign, you are spamming. So stop it.

You've linked your petition. Continuing to provide updates that no one is asking for is spamming. Continuing to do so may result in banning and deletion of all your posts, so if you care about your petition, I suggest not talking about it incessantly.